Dinesh D’Souza, Creator of ‘2000 Mules,’ Must Defend Film’s Election Denial Claims in Court

So, one of the 2000 mules, folks whom D'Souza claimed was stuffing ballots, one of them is suing D'Souza for defamation. The guy was getting death threats, etc., and all he did was carry his wife's and adult kid's ballots and drop it off at a drop box, it was legal. He, according to Dinesh, was a criminal.

This is what I can't stand about guys like him and Trump, someone takes a video and they assume there is nefarious activity. Did they bother and do some interviews? Ask some questions? Do their homework? No, they'd rather ruin peoples lives for cheap money, and make no mistake, the film grossed $10 million. D'Souza deserves to be sued, and I hope they score a big one, like Ruby & Shay did to Giuliani. A lot of people should be sued over Trump's lies, including Trump, himself, who started all this nonsense.

The article below covers the legal challenges faced by Dinesh D'Souza regarding the film's election denial claims. D'Souza tried to get the suit tossed out, but the court ruled against him and now he is compelled to defend the assertions made in his movie in a court of law. I can't wait to hear him prove his lies ion court. Now the world will see that t his film is bullsit.

The film reportedly challenges the results of a particular election, raising concerns about its accuracy and legitimacy. The article highlights the significance of this legal battle, as it questions the veracity of the claims made in '2000 Mules' and explores the potential consequences for D'Souza and his film. It also touches upon the broader issue of election denial and its impact on the democratic process. Overall, the article provides a comprehensive overview of the case and its implications, shedding light on the ongoing controversy surrounding the film and its allegations.

https://coloradotimesrecorder.com/2...-films-election-denial-claims-in-court/57940/

Bill Barr, Trump’s former attorney general, scoffed at the film’s claims in his testimony to the House January 6 committee, calling its evidence “singularly unimpressive.”

 

If the film singled out an individual and claimed that individual broke a law, the filmmaker should be able to provide evidence.

Is that what happened?

 

If you changed the name of the movie to "2000 Dumb Asses", would that be more descriptive of it's audience?

 

Interesting..... I can't wait to see what "discovery" uncovers. Talk about opening a can of worms.... some folks are going to have some splanin' to do of why they were stuffing many ballots into one box... when it would never be allowed otherwise. Your answer to the questions "Did they bother and do some interviews? Ask some questions? Do their homework? " will be actually done now. They used the very cell phone triangulation technology the government used to track down J6's 2 years later, so it will be very interesting to see how it concludes...

 

I hope he gets awarded the same amount as Ruby Freeman. These guys HAVE to learn that actions have consequences

 

More legal harassment by people who are causing more and more people to doubt the legitimacy of 2020. As they try to hunt down anyone who says otherwise.

 

Who is "they" allegedly doing the hunting? Question: If someone has legally cast a ballot and then is being falsely and publicly accused of ballot box stuffing, isn't it in their full right to defend themselves against the defamation?

 

The only thing the movie mentions is an address and how many trips to a ballot box does it take to vote?

 

It is a much bigger problem - even if the court decides that the movie showed false information - thousands, if not millions of Americans will still believe it is the truth.
And if D'Souza covered faces of the guy who 'stuffed ballots' - there would be no legal repercussions.
I think it is an unresolvable problem - if humans believe in something - it is very difficult to find evidence that would convince them they are wrong.
For example - recently we have two opposite propaganda sources: Hamas and Israel. Israel is a democratic country with a very strong HEALTHY government opposition. Where as opposing Hamas can gravely endanger life. And there are many people who take Hamas propaganda like a holly Bible.

 

The individual suing got death threats, so, apparently so.

 

Harassment? What about teh harassment to people like Ruby & Shay, those folks in the film wrongfully accused, Rusty Bowers, Raffensperger, all harassed by Trump's base only because Trump said they were part of the election stealing, but it was all lies?

What about that harrassment? Do you even care?

 

Yes, Donald Trump and his surrogates, spread lies, and by so doing, damaged confidence in American democracy, which is an assault on democracy, and American sacred core value, for which Trump has been indicted, and will be convicted, and sent to prison.

Rightfully so.

The best we can do is root out the cause, put them on trial, and let the world see how the 'evidence' is a lie, and that these perpetrators are traitors.

That's Israel's problem, not ours.

 

what harassment no one even new who they were until the suit was filed

 

It's astonishing that Trump loving rightists actually believe anything from a convicted felon, Dinesh.

But they also believe trumps words to be gospel, so there's that.

 

Matters not what humans believe in court cases.
Only what the court believes. And in this civil case, if and how much money will it cost.

 

What in what humans believes matters during elections.
Courts does not believe, courts must follow the law (at least theoretically speaking )

 

The info in that article is vague and I have no interest in watching that movie (we already know the election was stolen, no need for movies about the obvious), however, if this guy did really just show footage of a man driving to the ballot box and claimed it was fraud then that individual has every right to sue him and I hope he wins if that is the case.

 

There is no evidence of the election being stolen, beyond Trump's attempts to steal it, anyway. But at least you haven't fallen for this braindead ****. Because the "documentary" was garbage.

 

So? It does suggest that there were far more than that who didn't sue.

But, we know that

1. Judges are being harassed.
2. Their clerks are being harassed.
3. Some of their families are being harassed
4. Election officials, both Repub and Dem are being harassed,

And that these harassments include doxing.

 

Consequences for criticizing the government? Yeah, that's what we need...lol

 

They work for the government. It comes with the territory. If there was any harassment at all, that is.

 

No one has proven that the election was stolen, despite 60+ lawsuits.

However, Trump has been indicted for trying to steal the election.

Republicans, not democrats, are the problem.

 

No, it doesn't come with the territory. Ruby & Shay, Raffensberger and Bowers, judges, their clerks, worked for years in their jobs and never got harassed or defamed until Trump came along.

 

The PA supreme court changed laws during the election period, to benefit the Democrats. That's illegal. That's evidence that the election was stolen.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/17/2020-election-pennsylvania-supreme-court-hands-democrats-a-win.html

 

You don't know that they NEVER got harassed...lol

Besides, the Colorado supreme court lied about the "deluge of threats"

https://x.com/Banned_Bill/status/1739758398395036073?s=20